On Wed, 12 Oct 2011, Avri Doria wrote:

> As you said 'none' is just one 'candidate' among the others.
> Nothing fancy.
> No cancellation of a person's vote.
>
> But can only be used in lieu of one person.
> And yes, if you think all of the candidates are awful, you still can only vote 'none' once.
> I thought of putting in none1 … none4, but decided that was overdoing it.
>
> And while we are speaking of ballots, I also think all ballots should have a write in possibility, but not only do I think that the current software does not support that option, I thought that doing this might be seen as a comment in an election with only one candidate.
>
> But if people are going to discuss the 'science of ballots' before future elections, I would like to put in a recommendation for the possibility of write in candidates.

hi Avri and all,

thank you for the answers to my question.  since the ballots came from
an icann address, it appeared to me that icann staff had set up the
ballot, yet again i am amazed at how many details you have handled for
the group...well done!

i endorse your suggestion that write in candidates should be included in
balloting.

on earlier discussion of improving participation, i wonder about the
use of the tally address for origination of ballot e-mail.    in the
PEDNR WG we had concerns about a renewal notice coming from a different
address than the registrant would normally receive mail from the
registrar.  it is possible that voting participation is negatively
impacted by the use of an e-mail address that is only used for this
function.

-ron